Quoting Cyril Brulebois (k...@debian.org): > > > partman-zfs is kfreebsd-* only; others are powerpc-specific, which is no > > > longer a release architecture. Christian, which update would be the best > > > one to reflect those changes? Add a minus sign after those packages in > > > packages_list? Or remove them from there entirely? > > > > I'd suggest tomove them to the attic, at leat the PPC ones. Not sure > > about partman-zfs, though. > > ACK for the attic move for ppc packages, but mu question was more about > the l10n part of it.
Well, if the packages are moved to the attic and removed from packages_list, the translation will vanish from the master files at the next l10n-sync run....and therefore will not interfere with statistics. > > I think partman-zfs should stay where it is (out of the attic), but its > translations shouldn't be taken into account for stats purposes? Well, we never did that (not counting arch-specific packages in statistics), which would enforce the idea that some arches are "more important" than others. But that's of course debatable given that the number of people installing a kFreeBSD system in anything else than English is probably near to zero. For sure, such packages' translations shoudl be marked for levels 3 and higher and shouldn't clutter the stats for levels 1 and 2. --
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
